'Dust to dust' is dust: Prius uses less energy than Hummer
In the last couple of years, the claim that the Toyota Prius has more environmental impact than a Hummer garnered attention on forums and blogs around the Internet. Hybrid-haters ecstatically point to a study by CNW Marketing Research called "Dust to Dust: The Energy Cost of New Vehicles From Concept to Disposal" (PDF). The premise of this study is that, when taking research, production, and fuel into account, a Prius will use more energy per mile than a Hummer. Knowledgeable people refuted elements of this study, but that didn't stop pundits such as George Will from happily quoting the study.
Now the study has been well discredited in a paper titled "Hummer versus Prius: 'Dust to Dust' Report Misleads the Media and Public with Bad Science" (PDF) by Dr. Peter H. Gleick of the Pacific Institute. Dr. Gleick's paper pokes holes in the original study, pointing out its poor assumptions such as the usable life of a Hummer H1 (35 years) versus the life of a Prius (11) years. The original study also based its conclusions on the lifetime miles of a Prius versus a Hummer H1, where it assumed 109,000 miles versus 379,000 miles, respectively. The 109,000 mile figure for the Prius is truly bizarre, as many people have documented their Priuses getting well over this number.
So the next time someone says, "You know what, a Prius uses more energy than a Hummer," you've got plenty of fuel to tell them they're completely wrong.
I'll believe the original story when they come out with a bio-diesel plug-in hybrid Hummer.
Of course, by the time they do that, the Prius will have long-been a plug-in, and could be running on bio-diesel, too.
Or maybe the point will be moot, since we could all be running our cars on saltwater, thanks to John Kanzius (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6vSxR6UKFM for more on that).
hummer in the picture... it looks like a jeep to me..
I think people want the environmentalists to be wrong. They want to believe that everything is all nice and hunkey dory, and there's no need to be alarmed, move along people... But, sorry, arguing with science and twiddling data until it looks prettier won't change the facts.
There hasn't been a single major environmental prescription for the environment over the past 20 years that hasn't caused more environmental damage than what it replaced.
- Ethanol: uses more energy than it creates
- Windmills: kills millions of birds
- MTBE: seeped into groundwater, causes cancer
- Hydroelectric dams: downstream salinization, preventing fish from spawning
- Paper recycling: caustic sludge from the de-inking process, decreasing fiber length, most isn't recycled-> landfill
Do some research on Dysprosium, a major component of hybrid batteries and motors. Find out where it comes from and what environmental damage.
The point of Dust to Dust is that the people buying a Prius simply don't care what environmental impact the vehicle ACTUALLY has, as long as they can LOOK like they're helping the environment. THAT is the denial of science. Try to find one other source of information that tells you the amount of carbon and other damaged caused by Prius production? You can't- it's a VACUUM of information. It also means a vacuum of thought from the left.
For example, it actually costs far MORE energy to make and then use Ethanol than pure gasoline. The point of Ethanol was to burn cleaner and to "strech" the amount of gasoline we use--but it actually costs MORE energy than it's even worth. That's an example of shortsightedness by politicians wanting to be seen as at least doing "something" for the environment, rather than thinking long and hard about what is the best thing to do. If they put the extra energy wasted on Ethanol into research for Hydrogen Cell technology, which has basicaly zero pollution...
1. E85 DEFINITELY takes less energy to produce than it contains. Fermi Lab and Argonne National Laboratories both came to this conclusion independently. In addition, the process by which E85 is manufactured is inherently less pollluting than the process of refining used to make gasoline. Remember, the CO2 released by burning Ethanol was removed from the atmophere by the plants used to make it, so it has a near-zero net impact.
2. Yes, the government plans to use H1's (HWWMMV's) for around 35 years, including a few RESET's (full strip-down repair and update cycles). During this time, the Prius would require multiple battery replacements. What is the environmental impact of those batteries? Where do you put the waste? The Prius may not use less energy, but it definitely has a higher total environmental impact than even a military HMMWWV, much less a typical civilian vehicle, whether or not either is running on biofuels.
Ethanol from sugar cane and biodiesel are a different story in terms of net energy and chemistry. Since the U.S. doesn't produce much sugar, we should seriously think about helping Haiti, the poorest country in the Western Hemishere, to increase its sugar production.
So America let's get informed here as we enter the brave new world beyond Peak Oil.
pzev
But warm and fuzziest for Mother Earth? I'll wait for the fuel cell car that can create its own hydrogen instead (yeah, I know...when pigs fly...or over the oil companies' collective dead bodies...).
such thing as a free lunch. Period. Besides, are YOU willing to take food off the
table and watch people starve so you can fill your tank?
The Pacific Institute produces no more of a rigorous analysis than the original paper.
The lack of concern over the environmental impact of a Prius by the Pacific Institute demonstrates that they really don't care about the environment.
Hence, the venerable Prius pails in comparison to my 96 1 ton Dodge Van which was cheaper to purchase in the first place, is still in perfect mechanical condition after 230,000 miles and can carry 3x more people and cargo at an OPEC boosting 15mpg.
Build your green friendly cars and burn up the world anyway - if only we really could warm the planet. Think of all the new farmland available. The more stabilized climate, less severe storms, the reduced energy needs during the wintertime, what a beautiful world this could be. Sadly we can't do any more about global warming than we can about solar activity which is the real culprit here. Down with Solar Warming!!!
But there are non-pecuniary costs to the environment which are not reflected in the purchase price. The paper Dust to Dust attempts (perhaps poorly) to quantify the total environmental impact of each vehicle produced. The absence of a more rigorous analysis of this is more an indictment of environmentalism than a knee-jerk, flippant response to this paper's flaws.
The bottom line is that Prius drivers don't give a damn how much the environment has been contaminated by their choice, as long as they gain Greenie Points from their friends and neighbors and get a nice subsidy from government to do it.
Face it, the Hummer H2 is a fuel thirsty gussied Suburban (the H3 a Trailblazer). They are both crap when it comes to the environment... E85 or not (and I'll get to that).
The Prius' long term environmental impact is still an unknown, but in terms of the energy it takes to produce one is unacceptable for an ROI. Further, as others have pointed out, the overall vehicle logevity and battery replacement/disposal issues will tax the environment and the owner(s).
Why not go to the Toyota dealership and plop down a cool $10K to $15K for a Yaris. The blasted thing gets a rippin' 29 MPG city and 35 MPG on the highway. AND it will probably last a good 300K+ without a hitch. You'd also do well in a Focus, Mazda3, Civic, or Versa. But wait, you would get to drive the vehicular status equivalent of a "LIVESTRONG" rubber wrist band (do you really care what anyone else thinks?).
As far as E85 is concerned: rubbish. Unless you have a FlexFuel car (or a modified car $$$), you can't use it. Also, it cannot be transported in the current pipeline systems. It has to be trucked. Also, the fermentation process spits out considerable amounts of CO2, the impact to farming (you can't replace food crops with fuel crops without adversely impacting everyone), and because of its low BTU content per gallon your mileage is lowered.
Butanol, on the other hand, is closer to petroleum based fuels than ethanol and it can be transported within current pipeline systems. Additionally the fermentation processes being developed are very promising.
And, of course, there are the tried and true sources of energy such as diesel, CNG, and LPG. Each have their own virtues. The verdict isn't out yet on biodiesel (but it looks promising).
-
by POWinCA
December 24, 2008 4:10 PM PST
- Of course, the typical brain-dead leftist missed the ENTIRE point of the original paper - that it is not a "given" that a hybrid vehicle is a net improvement for the environment. Your Orwellian Crimestop kicked in the moment you saw "Hummer vs. Prius", in other words, "Devil vs. God."
-
Reply to this comment
-
(22 Comments)The fact of the matter is that if you owned a Hummer, trading it in for a Prius would NOT spare the environment any carbon dioxide. The CO2 emitted in PRODUCING a Prius would more than outweigh the CO2 SAVINGS of a Prius relative to a Hummer. Furthermore, if you and everyone else trade in your gas guzzlers, it lowers their price and SUBSIDIZES the fuel consumption of its next owner. It does not remove the vehicle from the road. You merely transfer YOUR carbon emissions to someone else and then add to it by driving your Prius.
Trading in any gas guzzler is not the environmentally best choice - driving it until it dies and then replacing it with a responsible vehicle is the best choice. Take careful note of the fact that Dust to Dust places some highly economical and environmentally friendly vehicles at the top of their list. But they committed the heinous crime of exposing your VANITY in being SEEN saving the environment, which is why you respond so violently. You're guilty of Greenwash!
Prius production requires relatively large quantities of nickel, mercury, and rare earth metals like dysprosium. 95% of dysprosium is mined in China which ravages its environment to get this rare metal. So for the sake of strutting around in your liberal chariot, you cause massive environmental devastation on the other side of the planet. Good going, numb skulls!
But the fact is that you CHOOSE to remain blind to the costs of your environmental boondoggles. You would rather be PERCEIVED as helping the environment than ACTUALLY helping it.
BTW, the rebuttal of Dust to Dust wasn't peer reviewed either and it presented no counterfactuals to challenge the assumptions made in the original paper. I have absolutely no doubt a Hummer has a longer service life than a Prius, particularly since the latter was engineered deliberately to be light, and therefore more maintenance-intensive.